New Jersey doctor accused of tax fraud scheme

Aug 31, 2015

New Jersey doctor accused of tax fraud scheme

Posted By
Brickfield & Donahue

On Aug. 25, a New Jersey doctor was taken into police custody after he
was accused of fabricating a payroll in order to avoid paying taxes. He
was essentially accused of falsely adding 28 people to a payroll in order
to appear as if he was paying these employees.

According to investigators, an accountant allegedly gave the doctor names,
social security numbers and other pertinent information in order to create
28 "phantom" employees. The doctor then allegedly paid $2.2
million to the phantom employees. At least 1,500 checks were issued. This
alleged scheme reportedly saved him more than $320,000 in taxes. It was
also alleged that the doctor earned about $1.4 million for services that
he may not have provided. He also reportedly did not pay taxes on this amount.

The doctor, age 44, was charged with tax fraud, records tampering and money
laundering, among others. A 51-year-old man who was also believed to be
involved in the scam was accused of being a co-conspirator. He was reportedly
facing similar charges that also include conspiracy and theft by deception.
Both were being held in jail on $200,000 bail when the report was released.

Being accused of fraud can result in serious consequences that could potentially
include jail or prison and the requirement to pay restitution. An attorney
may craft a defense depending on the case circumstances. For example,
if the evidence against the accused person is not strong, the attorney
may argue that the person was not involved in the fraud scheme. If there
is strong evidence, the accused person may be given an opportunity to
work with the prosecution, which could reduce the severity of the charges
and the associated consequences.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only.
Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual
case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt
or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.